MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2128435186 · doi:10.1103/physreve.85.026108

Structural preferential attachment: Stochastic process for the growth of scale-free, modular, and self-similar systems

2012· article· en· W2128435186 on OpenAlexafffund
Laurent Hébert‐Dufresne, Antoine Allard, Vincent Marceau, Pierre‐André Noël, Louis J. Dubé

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review E · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicComplex Network Analysis Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsModularity (biology)Preferential attachmentScalingStatistical physicsProcess (computing)Modular designStochastic processIndependence (probability theory)Scale (ratio)Computer scienceSelf-similaritySelf-organizationComplex systemSimilarity (geometry)Theoretical computer scienceComplex networkMathematicsArtificial intelligencePhysicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many complex systems have been shown to share universal properties of organization, such as scale independence, modularity, and self-similarity. We borrow tools from statistical physics in order to study structural preferential attachment (SPA), a recently proposed growth principle for the emergence of the aforementioned properties. We study the corresponding stochastic process in terms of its time evolution, its asymptotic behavior, and the scaling properties of its statistical steady state. Moreover, approximations are introduced to facilitate the modeling of real systems, mainly complex networks, using SPA. Finally, we investigate a particular behavior observed in the stochastic process, the peloton dynamics, and show how it predicts some features of real growing systems using prose samples as an example.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.772
Threshold uncertainty score0.452

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.023
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.302 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations14
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical Review ESame topicComplex Network Analysis TechniquesFrench-language works237,207